Devolution: Publication of White Paper (Hansard, 5 June 1997)

§ The Lord Privy Seal (Lord Richard)
My Lords, it is proposed that the White Paper will be published before the House rises for the Summer Recess and in good time for the people of Scotland and Wales to have a proper opportunity to assess, debate and judge our proposals before being asked to vote on them.

Viscount Cranborne
My Lords, I am extremely grateful to the Leader of the House for that reply. I know that he is notorious for the excellence of his memory. I ask, therefore, whether he remembers an intervention by the Deputy Chief Whip of the present Government on 11 th November 1996, when he said that codes of practice should be published in time for us to take amendments at Committee stage. Since the White Paper is clearly the equivalent of a code of practice for this extremely important Bill, does the Leader of the House think that the same principle should apply in this case and that the White Paper should be published in time for us to take amendments at Committee stage in the light of what it states?

§ Lord Richard
My Lords, the noble Viscount's memory is much better than mine. I have no recollection of what the Deputy Chief Whip said on 11th November 1996. But, the comment having been drawn to my attention, I shall look it up.
No, I do not think that the suggestion of the noble Viscount makes sense. It has always been our intention that the referendum Bill should achieve its passage through both Houses of Parliament, that a White Paper should then be published and that on the basis of that White Paper the people of Scotland and Wales should then vote in the referendum.

Lord Campbell of Croy
My Lords, is one reason for the delay in producing this White Paper some 707 disagreement within the Government? For example, the right honourable gentleman Mr. Robin Cook, now Foreign Secretary, strongly opposed a similar devolution scheme. Speaking in another place in 1977, he said that he hoped that the whole issue would be killed and buried for all time. Has he now performed a sensational U-turn?

§ Lord Richard
My Lords, by definition there is never disagreement internally within governments. However, the answer to the noble Lord's question is no.

§ Earl Russell
My Lords, as one who remembers the occasion on 11th November last to which the noble Viscount referred, does the Lord Privy Seal agree that there is a significant difference? We could not amend the code of practice before it came into force, but we shall be able to amend the Bill before it comes into force. The cases are not on all fours.

§ Lord Richard
My Lords, I admire the noble Earl's memory; and I agree with what he said.

Lord Renton
My Lords, does the Leader of the House remember that on the rare occasions when we have been asked previously to approve referenda, the exact nature of the matters upon which the people would have to vote in those referenda had been made known in advance to Parliament? The noble Lord was in Parliament at the time, so he will remember. I refer to the referendum on joining the European Economic Community, as it then was. All the circumstances were well known to the people then. The Bills for the referenda on Scotland and Wales contained proposals on which the people were asked to express their views. Bearing in mind previous practice, is it not unconstitutional to be asked to approve referenda without being told exactly what the referenda will be about?

§ Lord Richard
My Lords, the noble Lord makes heavy weather of this, as indeed does the party opposite. The position is perfectly clear. The Labour Government were elected on the basis of a manifesto which contained a clear commitment for devolution in Scotland and Wales and for the holding of referendums before that devolution took place. In the referendum Bill we propose the mechanism for the referendums which will take place. The proposals upon which the people of Scotland and Wales will be asked to vote will be contained in the White Paper which will be published before the House rises for the Summer Recess. I should have thought that that gave the people of Scotland and Wales ample opportunity to consider those proposals before they vote.

§ Lord Harris of Greenwich
My Lords, perhaps I may—

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, this side.

§ Lord Richard
My Lords, I am reluctant to intervene as to whose questions I should answer. However, it seems to me that this side is at the head of the queue at present.

§ Lord Stoddart of Swindon
My Lords, yes, and I shall be brief. Will my noble friend confirm that the 708 noble Lord, Lord Renton, was in error when he said that we had a referendum on our entry into the European Community? The true fact is that we had been in the Community for 18 months before we had a referendum to decide whether we remained in.

§ Lord Richard
My Lords, my noble friend is quite right.

§ Lord Harris of Greenwich
My Lords, perhaps I may now ask the noble Lord a question. Does he agree with me that, notwithstanding what has been said on the Conservative Benches this afternoon, it is quite clear that in the recent general election the people of Scotland and Wales understood precisely the issues as regards devolution? That is why there is not a single Conservative Member of Parliament in either Scotland or Wales.

§ Lord Richard
My Lords, out of deference to the tender feelings of the party opposite I had omitted to mention that fact in my answer.

§ Lord Fraser of Carmyllie
My Lords, the Prime Minister has asserted that he has a mandate to consult the Scottish people in a referendum. Can the noble Lord tell me who the Scottish people are?

§ Lord Richard
My Lords, the people who will be entitled to vote in the referendum are those who are resident in Scotland or Wales at the time that the referendum takes place.

§ Lord Beloff
My Lords, will the noble Lord the Leader of the House cast his mind back to only yesterday, when the Prime Minister said that a White Paper was sufficient because it would set out everything that was to be in the Bill? If the Prime Minister is correct, why not save money, paper and ink and publish the Bill before the referendums?

§ Lord Richard
My Lords, my right honourable friend the Prime Minister today wrote to the Leader of the Opposition in another place. He said: Thank you for your letter of earlier today concerning the points we discussed in the House of Commons this afternoon. It has always been made clear that the referendum will take place on proposals set out in a White Paper. I made that clear in a speech as long ago as 28 June last year. It was clearly stated in the Labour Party Manifesto, which said 'as soon as possible after the election, we will enact legislation to allow the people of Scotland and Wales to vote in separate referendums on our proposals, which will be set out in white papers'. And it went on, 'following majorities in the referendums, we will introduce in the first year of the Parliament legislation on the substantive devolution proposals outlined in our white papers'. Donald Dewar also explained this to the House on 16 May, i.e. two days after my comments which you put to me, and again on 21 May. This has always been understood to be the case". 709 It was understood to be the case by the electorates in Scotland and Wales at the last election.

Viscount Cranborne
My Lords, if the people of Scotland and Wales have the mandate, as the Lord Privy Seal claims, why does he need a referendum in the first place?

§ Lord Richard
My Lords, we took the sensible view that, in order to ensure popular consent for the proposals, we should hold a referendum before the Bill was introduced. I am slightly surprised that the allegation is now being made from the other side that this is an excess of democracy.

§ Baroness Carnegy of Lour
My Lords—

§ Lord Campbell of Alloway
My Lords—

§ Lord Richard
My Lords, again I find myself in a somewhat embarrassing position. If someone else were answering Questions, I should now say that we should move on since we have only six minutes left for the last Question.